RESTRICTED  
  
INF/TE/IDP/R/2  
 
14 July 2021  
(21-5577) Page: 1/7 
  Original: English  
 
INFORMAL DIALOGUE ON PLASTICS POLLUTION AND ENVIRONMENTALLY SUSTAINABLE 
PLASTICS TRADE  
 
MEETING HELD ON 21 JUNE 2021  
Informal summary by the Coordinators1 
_______________  
 
 
The third meeting of the Informal Dialogue on Plastics Pollution and Environmentally Sustainable 
Plastics Trade (IDP) was held on 21 June 2021. The meeting was co -chaired by Ambassador 
Blackman (Barbados) and Ambassador Valencia (Ecuador).  The agenda for the meeting was 
contained in WTO document  INF/TE/IDP/CN/ 2/Rev. 1, circulated on 11 June  2021. All WTO Members 
were invited to attend and participate actively in the meeting.  
 
1  INTRODUCTORY REMARKS FROM THE COORDINATORS  
1.1.  On behalf of the Coordinators, Ambassador Blackman welcomed participants and noted 2021  
would  usher in several opportunities for meaningful reform and further set the global sustainable 
development agenda in  an upward trajectory . Developing countries were severely and 
disproportionately impacted by the impacts of the climate crisis and  environmental  emergen cies. 
Plastics pollution and environmentally sustainable plastics trade were therefore of critical importance 
to Small Island Developing States (SIDS) and other countries.  He reminded participants that the  
WTO was a trade organization and not an en vironmental sustainability institution . Thus, it  must not 
duplicate work that was being undertaken by other and more relevant organizations or take up the 
mandate of other international organizations. He finally noted that the meeting marked the start of 
intensive exchanges among Members on the expected MC12 Ministerial Declaration.  
1.2.  Ambassador Valencia appreciated the large number of Members and stakeholders that had 
taken part in the IDP sessions and positively contributed to the topic of plastics polluti on and 
environmentally sustainable plastics trade. The Ambassador recalled that previous meetings had 
emphasized the topics of hidden flows of plastic s trade, challenges related to trade classification of 
plastics and explored ways to improve transparency.  Cooperation in the multilateral trading system 
had also been discussed, including the need to better identify how trade policy could better 
complement the ongoing efforts at the international level such as the implementation of the Basel 
Convention Plasti cs Amendment or the process under the United Nations Environment Assembly 
(UNEA). He reminded participants that the meeting would focus on the  remaining three  topics 
enunciated in the IDP initial statement (WT/CTE/W/250), namely:  policy coherence ; capacity and 
technical assistance needs ; and collective approaches.  
1.3.  Ambassador Li (China) noted how  policy coherence should be a central topic in discussions 
since a chieving more sustainable plastics trade require d collaborative approaches across many policy 
areas, different ministries and international organizations. Technical assistance and collective 
approaches were also central when there was a lack of expertise and resources. He recalled the last 
 
1 This summary, prepared and circulated under the Coordinators' responsibility, is being shared with a 
view to providing delegations with a record of the discussions and assisting t hem in reporting back to their 
capitals. It provides a non -exhaustive, illus trative review of the issues addressed by Members at the meeting. 
The voluntary Coordinators were Australia, Barbados, China, Ecuador, Fiji and Morocco.  INF/TE/IDP/R/2  
 
- 2 - 
 
  informal dialo gue would discuss a draft ministerial declaration to be presented during the 
WTO 12th Ministerial Conference (MC12). He encouraged all co -sponsors and interested Members to 
work together in the coming months. He noted the declaration  could take stock of th e discussions 
on the six aspects of the initiative, express a collective political will to support ongoing domestic, 
regional and international efforts and provide horizontal guidelines or principles for future discussions 
such as ensuring mutual support a nd complementarity, avoiding duplication of efforts, focusing on 
trade -specific aspects and added value , enhancing circularity  coherence, effectiveness and 
efficiency , and promoting environmentally sustainable trade and environmental integrity. Finally, he  
noted there were clear synergies between the IDP and the Trade and Environmental Sustainability 
Structured Discussions (TESSD) and looked forward to continued cooperation.  
1.4.  Mr Aik Hoe Lim, Director of the WTO Trade and Environment Division , noted that addr essing 
plastic pollution would require a comprehensive mapping of the plastics value chain, and analysing 
the opportunities and challenges that arise therein. Discussions among delegations concerning trade 
and plastics had quadrupled since November 2020 an d, by that metric alone, the initiative had 
already been very successful. In only three meetings, 19 different stakeholders had shared their 
views, research and efforts on the topic of plastic pollution more than 30 times. That had included 
pivotal subject s such as maritime litter, trade -related capacity constraints and ongoing 
UN discussions. He found it encouraging to hear pragmatic solutions being tabled and to observe 
the willingness to address plastic pollution challenges. The Director noted the time h ad come to shift 
gears given the rapidly approaching MC12, and he found it very encouraging to hear the plan to 
move towards a more concrete discussion on elements for a Ministerial Declaration and a roadmap 
for potential outcomes post -MC12.  
2  TECHNICAL SEGM ENT: STRENGTHENING POLICY COHERENCE, ASSESSING CAPACITY 
AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE NEEDS AND COLLECTIVE APPROACHES  
2.1.  Dr Sascha Fuller and Dr Trisia Farrelly presented their study titled 'Plastic pollution prevention 
in Pacific Island Countries: Gap analysis of  current legislation, policies and plans'. The Pacific Islands 
were increasingly dependent on imported goods, many coming in disposable plastic packaging. The 
toxic chemicals of those plastics persisted in ecosystems and the Pacific Island Countries were s ome 
of the most severely impacted by plastic pollution. The study had found that , even with the most 
robust national legislative and policy frameworks for plastic pollution prevention, island nations 
would require significant support of the international c ommunity to close the gap in the necessary 
policy framework  due to the transboundary flows of plastics . The policy gap analysis  indicated the 
existence of  only one reference in all policy documents studied that explicitly mention ed the 
prevention of microp lastics. There was almost no regulation on virgin, fossil fuel -based plastics. Last, 
there was almost no market restrictions preventing a broader range of problematic plastics from 
circulating in the economy.  
2.2.  Human rights law obligate d governments and industr ies to take full responsibility for the 
lifecycle of plastics.  However, the Pacific Island  Countries lacked the political and economic power 
to compel companies to seek and obtain ongoing social licen ce to operate end -of-life management 
technologies. Thus, national policy frameworks could not fully and faithfully domesticate and 
integrate inter national plastic pollution -related human rights obligations due to resource and 
capacity constraints, and because the main source of the problem did not reside in the region. For 
that reason, there was overwhelming support for a global treaty among partici pants interviewed in 
the research, as it would support a shared regional position that helped address boundary 
challenges, promote extended producer responsibility, and compel plastics producers and 
manufacturers to design safe products that prevented plas tic pollution at source.  
2.3.  The European Union presented its experience with the transition to a Circular Plastics Sector. 
The transition plan consisted of several policies, including the 2019 plastics strategy and the 
single -use plastic (SUP) directive, whic h sought to address the source of around 70% of the marine 
litter on the European Union 's coast line. The most SUP items found on European beaches included 
drink bottles, cups, cigarette butts, bags and food containers. Some SUPs had been banned entirely, 
such as straws and cutlery, while other measures were in place for items for which no clear 
sustainable alternatives were available ( e.g. consumer information labelling requirements). Other 
instrument s used by the EU w ere the waste directive revised in 2018  and the plastic packaging 
recycling target , which aimed to achieve 55 % of recycled plastic packaging by 2030.  INF/TE/IDP/R/2  
 
- 3 - 
 
  2.4.  The EU Circular Economy Action Plan issued in March 2020 contained 35 actions along the 
entire lifecycle of products that were also relevant for  plastics and plastic products. It sought to keep 
the value of plastic material in the circular economy, including by adopting mandatory requirements 
for recycled content and waste reduction measures, addressing the presence of microplastics in the 
environ ment and issuing a policy framework on bio -based, compostable and biodegradable plastics. 
Finally, the EU also had a zero -pollution strategy in place , which envisaged other policies and 
potential reforms such as restrictions on export of problematic plasti cs, EU budget incentives for 
increased national recycling rates and promotion of a well -functioning EU market for secondary raw 
materials. The EU was committed to a global agreement on plastics, as plastics had to be addressed 
globally.  
2.5.  Ms Ingeborg Mork -Knutsen, Senior Adviser at the Ministry of Climate and Environment of 
Norway presented a study on the role of regional instruments in strengthening cooperation in marine 
plastics pollution. Sources of marine litter differed in different places  – northern Nor way experienced 
more litter coming from primarily fisheries and aquaculture, whereas southern Norway experienced 
litter coming from consumer goods and SUP items. The research looked at regional instruments to 
combat marine plastic litter, including  regiona l seas conventions and action plans, large marine 
ecosystem activities, regional economic organizations and regional fisheries bodies , and a case study 
on the Mediterranean. The study concluded that there was a substantial role for the regional level 
in co mbatting marine plastic litter , although there was substantial variation in the level of 
implementation measures to address plastic pollution across different regions. Recommendations 
were included in the research. The report also found that a new global a greement would provide 
both top -down and bottom -up benefits to combat marine plastic litter in the environment. Norway 
welcomed the contribution of the regional level as one move forward in preparing for the new global 
agreement under the auspices of the UNEA. 
2.6.  Mr Clem Ugorji and Ms  Colette van der Ven presented their study under the World Economic 
Forum  (WEF)  Global Plastic Action Partnership (GPAP) titled 'Trade and Plastics pollution work in 
Ghana '. The study was the result of a n on-the-ground GPAP project looking at the challenges and 
opportunities of using trade and trade policy as enablers for a more circular and sustainable plastic 
economy in Ghana. The study indicated that 70% of the plastics used in Ghana were SUPs for 
packaging. Ad ditionally, 100% of the plastics used for packaging in Ghana were virgin plastics.  The 
researchers suggested better enforcement of an existing ban on plastic shopping bags and 
establishing a minimum recycled plastics content mandate to  generate demand for plastic recycling 
in the country. G hana should  also deploy other  policy instruments to stimulate domestic demand for 
recycled plastics, as well as derived products , focusing in the short -term, on bottle -to-bottle  
recycling for the food and beverage industr y, and bricks, boards and pipes recycling for the 
construction industry. In the long term, the use of recycling plastics in the emerging automotive 
industry should be pursued.   
2.7.  The second part of the paper indicated  what Ghana c ould do proactively to lever age trade 
agreements  to promote plastic circularity . It included: enhancing trade control and implementation 
of the Basel Convention Plastic Waste Amendment; identifying and facilitating safe trade in relevant 
upstream and downstream inputs; attracting key  investment and services through proactive services 
negotiations; developing export markets ; leveraging regional platforms to develop regional 
standards on plastic recycling grades; and intra -ministerial cooperation. Finally, it was important 
that internat ional institutions and public -private partnerships were considered in achieving  the 
objective of reducing plastic pollution in Ghana.  
2.8.  Ms Kristin Olofsson presented the International Organization for Standardization  (ISO) work on 
plastics -related standards in support of greater policy coherence and efficiency.  Technical 
committee  61 was ISO's  plastics committee. Its subcommittee 14 focused on plastics environmental 
aspects, subdivided in to five working groups: (i) terminology, clas sifications and general guidance; 
(ii) biodegradability; (iii) bio -based  plastics; (iv) plastics leaked into the environment (including 
microplastics) and quality control criteria of respective methods; and (v) mechanical and chemical 
recycling. As in othe r ISO working groups, experts representing governments, business associations, 
industry, academia and NGOs all took part in discussion s.  
2.9.  She highlighted that ISO work was also done in collaboration with efforts developed by other 
standardization and regio nal organizations, such as the Circular Plastic Alliance in Europe. The 
Alliance consisted of several thematic groups, focusing on horizontal topics such as monitoring and 
packaging, or under a sectoral basis such as agriculture, automotive and building. I SO and other INF/TE/IDP/R/2  
 
- 4 - 
 
  standardization organizations were focused in identifying standardization needs to ensure the 
plastics value chain in different sectors moved from a linear to a circular approach.  
3  INTERVENTIONS FROM OTHER DELEGATIONS AND STAKEHO LDERS2 
3.1.  The Un ited Kingdom (UK) was currently considering a series of policy measures under its waste 
prevention program such as eco -design and consumer information regulations to encourage durable, 
reusable or recyclable goods on the market. The UK was committed to sup porting the most 
vulnerable countries in mitigating the adverse effects of plastics pollution. The UK was also pleased 
to provide support to WEF's GPAP and the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development 
(UNCTAD) Sustainable Manufacturing and Enviro nmental Pollution (SMEP)  program. The UK 
additionally pointed out the work of the Commonwealth Litter Program since 2018 on maritime litter.  
3.2.  Chad, on behalf of the Least Developed Countrie s (LDCs) Group, emphasized the importance 
of the IDP and reiterated  the importance of thinking about how the WTO can play a central role in 
the fight against plastic pollution and the promotion of economic environmentally sustainable trade . 
The reflection on how to support national , regional and global efforts had to  continue. Chad 
supported the relaunch of discussion on an environmental goods agreement , which could reduce 
barriers to trade for products that were environmentally friendly. Transparency should also be 
improved so that Members could properly evaluate progress made. Support for LDCs was needed 
for a circular economy, including technology tran sfer. In that context, the LDCs Group sought the 
effective implementation of Article 66(2) of the TRIPS Agreement. Chad asked the IDP if they could 
further explore the specific impact of plastic pollution on LDCs.  
3.3.  Switzerland stressed it was now unconteste d that trade policy and international cooperation on 
trade were an important part of efforts  to tackle this global plastic crisis . It noted it did not export 
plastic waste to developing countries and had ratified the Ban Amendment to the Basel Convention. 
It supported the start of negotiations towards a global plastics agreement. On policy coherence, 
Switzerland noted the measures adopted by other Members and encouraged the sharing of good 
practices to improve coherence between measures. On cooperation and coordination, Switzerland 
noticed existing gaps in international trade cooperation, based solely on the Basel Convention and 
waste, while encouraging others to join the Plastic Waste Partnership. Switzerland supported 
technical international standards and labels for plastics to promote a more environmentally 
sustainable plastic s sector and private sector engagement. Additionally, Switzerland noted the need 
for amendments to the Harmonized System for international trade flows of plastics and enhancing 
transp arency and information -sharing on plastic waste and products. Lastly, developing countries 
should have access to technical assistance to implement trade policies on plastic pollution. 
Switzerland also stressed the need to ensure synergies between the IDP a nd the TESSD.  
3.4.  The Maldives reiterated that SIDS were particularly vulnerable to global warming and climate 
change. It was very concerned about increased plastic pollution. The Maldives had banned the import 
of several single -use plastics. The Maldives had also coordinated efforts to educate its population on 
plastic waste, to intercept plastic waste, and to redesign alternative and new solutions to plastics. 
The Maldives coordinated domestic plastic policies with all relevant authorities.  
3.5.  Jamaica noted that  there was a need for improved access to cost -effective and environmentally 
friendly alternatives to plastics, in particular single -use plastics. International cooperation and 
assisting developing countries were important to incentivize trade and investmen t opportunities in 
new markets of substitute and alternative plastics. The lack of global policy coherence in addressing 
plastic pollution posed a threat to the commitments and accomplishments at the national level, and 
there was a need to develop universa l specifications for plastic waste, standards and guidelines on 
sorting, handling and separation of plastics.  Enhance d waste management capacity require d clear 
 
2 Delegations had been provided with three sets of "guiding questions" for the open discussion: (a) What 
are the main trade -related challenges your country or region faces in addressing plastics pollution and moving 
towards environmentally sustainable plastics trade? How could trade capacity and technical assistance support 
your domestic authorities?  (b) How to ensure policy coherence among different domestic, regional and 
international institutions? How to improve domestic coordination and better policymaking? How could trade policy 
and the multilateral trading system efficiently support/complement the work of environment agencies and / or 
domestic and regional mechanisms addressing plastics pollution and moving towards environmentally susta inable 
plastics trade?  (c) What are specific challenges in addressing plastics pollution and moving towards 
environmentally sustainable plastics trade that could benefit from collective and regional approaches? What role 
for multilateral trade cooperation in scaling -up best practices?  See INF/TE/IDP/CN/2 . INF/TE/IDP/R/2  
 
- 5 - 
 
  testing and categorization systems of plastic waste . Jamaica also called for greater access to c limate 
financing, which was needed for environmental sustainability. Jamaica reiterated its commitment to 
multilateralism and national efforts on plastic pollution such as bans on single -use plastic.  
3.6.  Canada noted  that, whereas downstream measures such as waste management were largely 
a domestic concern, other points in the value chain necessarily implicated international trade such 
as the design of plastic products and packaging. Canada sometimes encountered resistance from 
international stakeholders invol ved in packaging, product design or performance, mostly due to cost 
concerns, even though these changes may be the most appropriate for reducing plastic pollution 
and waste. Canada had launched the Oceans Plastics Charter at the G7 Summit in 2018, the only  
global framework that took a comprehensive lifecycle approach to addressing marine plastic 
pollution. Canada encouraged synergies between the different WTO initiatives, noting the TESSD 
had stressed the need for cooperation and capacity building in suppor t of developing countries' 
transition to a circular economy. It also emphasized the need for coordinated global actions, 
participation of stakeholders in the IDP and transparency for all measures concerning plastics 
pollution and plastics waste. IDP Member s could consider how the WTO could be more involved in 
discussions in forums like the Basel Convention and could focus efforts to improve policy coherence 
on providing clear guidance to stakeholders, in particular those operating international business 
models and supply chains, on how to meet similar obligations in different jurisdictions.  Canada 
encouraged  all Members to participate in the  IDP discussions and to help build towards a meaningful 
outcome  for MC12.  
3.7.  The Russian Federation spoke for the first ti me in the IDP and expressed its gratitude to all 
those involved in the establishment of the Informal Dialogue. Plastic pollution was an extremely 
important topic at the moment. It fully supported international cooperation and efforts aimed at 
promoting sus tainable development and more environmentally sustainable plastic s trade taking into 
account  the interests of all WTO Members. It was interesting and important to evaluate possible 
ways for trade policy to contribute to domestic, regional and international  efforts to reduce plastics 
pollution and transition to a more circular and environmentally sustainable global plastics economy. 
The Russia n Federation  was closely following the discussions and would appreciate its continuation 
in accordance with the principles of transparency, inclusiveness and avoiding duplication of 
processes.  
3.8.  Australia found the exchange of information and knowledge provided by the I DP to be highly 
valuable, in particular on how technical assistance could and was aiding developing countries to 
implement policies to deal with environmental challenges created by plastics. It noted that a shared 
understanding on existing supply chains on  plastics, its manufacturing, use and recycling was 
required and that dealing with policy inconsistency was one of the greatest challenges to be 
addressed in the IDP, including diverging classifications, rules and regulations. Australia saw a clear 
role fo r the business and expert communities to share experiences and knowledge on these value 
chains and regulatory frameworks. Elements to be comprised in a MC12 joint statement or roadmap 
could include: enhanced transparency; greater regulatory cooperation acr oss plastics supply chains 
to encourage more environmentally responsible trade; finding ways to reduce trade in the more 
problematic plastics and packaging; reducing plastics and microplastics leaking into the 
environment; and encouraging trade in environm entally sustainable plastics and alternatives.  
3.9.  The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) emphasized the history of collaboration 
between the WTO and UNEP. It briefed participants on the work developed on marine litter and 
microplastics in the contex t of the U NEA since 2014. In 2017, the ad -hoc group on marine litter and 
microplastics had been created. The mandate of the ad -hoc group was renewed in 2019, with a state 
of knowledge report on marine litter. Alongside  the adoption of several resolutions o n marine litter 
and microplastics, other resolutions had addressed single -use plastics and plastic waste 
management. In 2022, the second part of UNEA's fifth assembly (UNEA -5) was expected to trigger 
an intergovernmental negotiation process on marine litte r and plastics pollution. Additionally, 
Germany, Ecuador, Ghana and Viet  Nam were co -hosting an informal Ministerial Conference on 
marine litter and plastic pollution in September 2021. It welcomed the excellent work developed 
under the IDP and the key imp ortance of trade guidance and regulations in the global efforts to 
address plastic pollution. It welcomed the political attention brought to the issue and concrete 
proposals and outcomes. UNEP looked forward to further engaging with the WTO and integrating  the 
work of the WTO in the UNEA process.  INF/TE/IDP/R/2  
 
- 6 - 
 
  3.10.   UNCTAD presented its work under the SMEP program. SMEP had an open call for proposals 
on plastics in the areas of biodegradability of alternatives to plastics and improved manufacturing 
and remanufacturing solutio ns. From 2022 onwards, UNCTAD would start providing technical 
assistance to SMEP target countries in Africa and Asia. The Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm 
Conventions Secretariat reiterated the importance of the plastic waste amendment , which had 
entered int o force in 2021. For better implementation, it was necessary to support parties in 
establishing the necessary legal and institutional frameworks. Additionally, education and training 
were crucial for effective implementation, including for exporters, carri ers, disposers, importers, 
customs port authorities, environmental agencies, the police, prosecutors and others. Accurate data 
was also required , as was capacity building for the prevention and minimization of plastic waste. 
Last, international cooperation  with the WCO, Interpol, the OECD, the WTO and others was crucial 
in address ing plastic pollution.  
3.11.   The Latin American Integration Association (ALADI) mentioned two upcoming rounds of trade 
discussions (so -called "business rounds") that were relevant to ad dressing plastic pollution in the 
region. A first round in August 2021 called " Creative Industries and I nformation and Communication 
Technologies " would include the participation of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) from 13 Latin 
American countries and f ocus on products that replace plastics, such as banana leaves, 
biodegradable packaging and other alternative products. A larger trade round in December would 
include a focus on plant and animal fib re value chains. The objective was to support SMEs in these  
sectors to reach markets and economies of scale. The Center for International Environmental Law 
(CIEL) emphasized that the plastic crisis was a global crisis and required a coordinated response. To 
reverse  these  negative  trends , states would  need to empha size and urgently implement upstream 
measures. However, the current legal and policy framework at the international, regional and 
sub-regional level did not provide the necessary solutions. States need ed to revise, strengthen and 
coordinate the existing fr amework and provide a new legally binding framework . Standardization 
measures for plastic pollution prevention such as product design, label ling, certification schemes, 
and others were needed, and virgin plastic production and use had to be gradually phase d down.  
3.12.   The International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) mentioned four policy 
objectives that could contribute to structuring the work program of the IDP in the post -MC12 phase. 
First, restrict ing trade in problematic plastics and waste and shrink ing the market for these materials. 
Regional and international cooperation was necessary to avoid diversion to nearby markets. Second, 
promot ing trade in plastic substitutes and recycled plastics. Third, remov ing trade barriers to 
recycling and waste  management goods and services. Fourth, in the long  term, a comprehensive 
approach towards fossil fuel subsidies for virgin plastics was required to address why so much plastic 
was being produced . The WEF provided further information on the GPAP , which was dedicated to 
reducing plastic pollution and waste across geographies. The GPAP Ghana study illustrate d that at 
the national level there was scope for trade policy to play a greater role in mitigating plastic pollution 
and waste, as well as movin g to alternatives for a more circular economy.  GPAP was seeking to 
expand across 25 emerging and developing countries by 2025.  
3.13.   The Graduate Institute drew attention to a new report titled ' How can international trade 
policy help tackle plastic pollution '. Its suggestions included to: ensure that single -use and harmful 
plastics banned or restricted nationally were not exported abroad; lower or eliminate tariffs and 
trade barriers to non -plastic substitutes and environmentally sound waste management technolo gies 
and facilitate trade in recycled plastics and recyclable plastics; put forward concrete pledges to 
reduce unnecessary trade in single -use plastics and excessive plastic packaging; adopt an aid for 
trade mandate to support developing countries to desig n and implement trade policies related to 
plastic pollution; provide guidance and leadership at the WTO Ministerial Conference by identifying 
priorities for work in other international bodies that would support more environmentally sustainable 
plastics tra de, including, inter alia , international standards and label ling for plastics and trade 
classification to promote more environmentally sustainable plastics trade.  
3.14.   The Ellen MacArthur Foundation noted that , to alleviate the negative impacts of plastics waste , 
the framework of the circular economy ha d been steadily gaining momentum as a credible  solution, 
shaped around three main pillars:  (i) eliminat ing unnecessary  plastics ; (ii) innovat ing to ensure  
necessa ry plastics are reusable, recyclable or  compostable ; and (iii) circulat ing plastic items to keep 
them in the economy and out of the environment . International policy discussions th us far had 
focused almost exclusively on waste and chemicals -related issues. As plastic supply and value chains 
were international, focus would inevitably shift to new rules for trade of plastic materials and 
products, and not just waste. A new global policy framework could trigger the development of new INF/TE/IDP/R/2  
 
- 7 - 
 
  harmoni zed industrial standards for designing products and packaging, ensuring that plastics therein 
were reusable, recyclable or compostable. For the development of global markets for 
remanufactured products containing plastics and recycled plastic materials, additi onal mechanisms 
and incentives could be developed, such as minimum requirements on the embodied carbon 
emissions or quality standards for secondary raw materials that would benefit from preferential trade 
conditions compared to waste shipments. Finally, ID P discussions should be shaped around the 
notion of value preservation so that this useful material is kept in the economy and out of the 
environment.  
4  CLOSING REMARKS AND NEXT STEPS  
4.1.  Ambassador Blackman noted that the IDP meeting had presented some key pers pectives that 
would  be critical for taking th e process forward.  Core to these discussions was the question as to 
how the WTO and trade policy could  assist in effectively tacklin g plastics pollution and in achieving 
environmentally sustainable plastics trad e. Technical assistance and capacity building and 
coordinated approach es were potential ways to assist in that endeavo ur. The  WTO should not 
duplicate the work from other international organizations but work together with them in a coherent 
and consistent  manner. He reminded everyone  that plastic pollution was not constrained by borders, 
it affect ed all countries alike. The Ambassador was encouraged by the growing support for the IDP 
initiative. He invite d all delegations to continue to engage meaningfully , including by sharing their 
views for an MC12  outcome . The next IDP meeting would  focus on the MC12 outcome and would  be 
chaired by Australia.  
 
__________